Hi everyone, I have a curious question: how do you conceptualise the process of ordering food at a restaurant in terms of contract? Hypothetically, if you ordered food from a restaurant but the food you received was different from what was advertised on the menu (not completely, but to a certain extent), can you refuse to pay by virtue of a breach of intermediate term? And if you can refuse to pay under Australian Consumer Law, can you still eat the food nonetheless because at the point of termination of the "contract". Future obligations are released and each parties obligations are frozen. Correct me if I'm wrong but this is my idea: This is a unilateral contract where: Offer is made when you order food, Acceptance and consideration when waiter delivers food to your table, If the food fails to be exactly as described, it could be an intermediate term (Hong Kong Fir Shipping), which gives rise to damages and perhaps to terminate. If terminated, can you refuse to pay but also eat the food?